|
|
Post by gameboy on Sept 27, 2019 6:12:45 GMT
Is or was "Piss Christ" art?
|
|
|
|
Post by ᵗʰᵉᵃᵘˣᵖʰᵒᵘ on Sept 27, 2019 7:20:19 GMT
Destroyed? Can’t they just refill it?
|
|
|
|
Post by maya55555 on Sept 27, 2019 19:41:14 GMT
IMO, do not mess with GOD
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2019 19:50:01 GMT
Great... more plastic ☹️
|
|
|
|
Post by WarrenPeace on Sept 28, 2019 4:06:14 GMT
Is or was "Piss Christ" art? I don't think of art as just something anyone can do. Like I could go to a store, buy a blank canvas and probably get it hung in a museum as modern art and call it "Untitled," and suckers will fall for it. I've seen this kind of shit in art museums. Or maybe it will have just a single black dot in the middle. Or whatever. Art should be more than that. Same thing with PC. Anyone can put a crucifix in a bottle of liquid light it up and photograph it. It's a con job by a con artist is what it is.
|
|
|
|
Post by maya55555 on Sept 28, 2019 5:09:32 GMT
 Warren Peace
Then you should see the works of Yoko Ono.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Santa PaulsLaugh on Sept 28, 2019 15:47:27 GMT
Piss Christ is a criticism of American Christianity.
Artist Andreas Serrano: I had no idea Piss Christ would get the attention it did, since I meant neither blasphemy nor offense by it. I've been a Catholic all my life, so I am a follower of Christ.
Serrano has not ascribed overtly political content to Piss Christ and related artworks, on the contrary stressing their ambiguity. He has also said that while this work is not intended to denounce religion, it alludes to a perceived commercializing or cheapening of Christian icons in contemporary culture. Subsequently, he has explicitly rejected the assertion that he was motivated by blasphemy, saying instead that it was intended as a serious work of Christian art. He said, "What it symbolizes is the way Christ died: the blood came out of him but so did the piss and the shit. Maybe if Piss Christ upsets you, it's because it gives some sense of what the crucifixion actually was like... I was born and raised a Catholic and I've been a Christian all my life." — Wikipedia
|
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Sept 29, 2019 0:16:56 GMT
Piss Christ is a criticism of American Christianity. Artist Andreas Serrano: I had no idea Piss Christ would get the attention it did, since I meant neither blasphemy nor offense by it. I've been a Catholic all my life, so I am a follower of Christ.
Serrano has not ascribed overtly political content to Piss Christ and related artworks, on the contrary stressing their ambiguity. He has also said that while this work is not intended to denounce religion, it alludes to a perceived commercializing or cheapening of Christian icons in contemporary culture. Subsequently, he has explicitly rejected the assertion that he was motivated by blasphemy, saying instead that it was intended as a serious work of Christian art. He said, "What it symbolizes is the way Christ died: the blood came out of him but so did the piss and the shit. Maybe if Piss Christ upsets you, it's because it gives some sense of what the crucifixion actually was like... I was born and raised a Catholic and I've been a Christian all my life." — Wikipedia
"What it symbolizes is the way Christ died: the blood came out of him but so did the piss and the shit. Maybe if Piss Christ upsets you, it's because it gives some sense of what the crucifixion actually was like...
I can't tell - do those two comments agree with each other?
As far as it being considered art... to me, it is more like a political cartoon, in that the statement is what the point is, not the technique used to create it. Though I have seen many political cartoons that I think were drawn by an artist. Some of those political cartoonists are very skilled in their style.
I've been an artist, and when I am serious about creating art, I pay great attention to my technique.
If I am trying to make a statement, the technique doesn't really matter.
Interesting question, OP.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Sept 29, 2019 1:06:47 GMT
It would've been even more effective if inverted.
|
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Sept 29, 2019 4:02:25 GMT
IMO, do not mess with GOD
Exactly! ; some people have no standards as stuff like that is a blatant attack on Christianity (and basically a attack on God) under the guise of "art".
He's obviously not a Catholic if he does something like this. if he claims to be Catholic ill bet he's pretty much Catholic in name only as he's pretty much going with the flow of the world to do something like this as ill bet someone like him rarely if ever prays etc.
either way, it makes no difference if he meant no offense by it etc, it should be obvious to him you just don't do that, period! ; it's clearly showing disrespect for Jesus Christ regardless if you intended that or not. personally I think he surely must have known it was disrespectful as it's just too hard to believe someone meant no disrespect given the name of that piece of 'art'.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Sept 29, 2019 4:03:28 GMT
Piss Christ is a criticism of American Christianity. Artist Andreas Serrano: I had no idea Piss Christ would get the attention it did, since I meant neither blasphemy nor offense by it. I've been a Catholic all my life, so I am a follower of Christ.
Serrano has not ascribed overtly political content to Piss Christ and related artworks, on the contrary stressing their ambiguity. He has also said that while this work is not intended to denounce religion, it alludes to a perceived commercializing or cheapening of Christian icons in contemporary culture. Subsequently, he has explicitly rejected the assertion that he was motivated by blasphemy, saying instead that it was intended as a serious work of Christian art. He said, "What it symbolizes is the way Christ died: the blood came out of him but so did the piss and the shit. Maybe if Piss Christ upsets you, it's because it gives some sense of what the crucifixion actually was like... I was born and raised a Catholic and I've been a Christian all my life." — Wikipedia I think Serrano is being disingenuous. Though I don't necessarily agree with the implications of the work itself, it was so obviously created to be blasphemous and take a jab at Christianity. Yes, Jesus was human. But if I were to take a picture of Martin Luther King or Gandhi and cover it with excrement and call it art, would liberals and atheists be so accepting of it? No, it would obviously be a repudiation of what those men stood for, equality and civil rights for all. So Serrano cannot tell me he merely wanted to show the humanity of Christ. He was attacking Christianity for the crusades and the witch trials and the intolerance of Christian fundamentalists. Serrano obviously got cold feet when he was attacked in the media and put forward a cover story.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Sept 29, 2019 4:22:20 GMT
IMO, do not mess with GOD
Exactly! ; some people have no standards as stuff like that is a blatant attack on Christianity (and basically a attack on God) under the guise of "art".
He's obviously not a Catholic if he does something like this. if he claims to be Catholic ill bet he's pretty much Catholic in name only as he's pretty much going with the flow of the world to do something like this as ill bet someone like him rarely if ever prays etc.
either way, it makes no difference if he meant no offense by it etc, it should be obvious to him you just don't do that, period! ; it's clearly showing disrespect for Jesus Christ regardless if you intended that or not. personally I think he surely must have known it was disrespectful as it's just too hard to believe someone meant no disrespect given the name of that piece of 'art'.
Did you know that there is no actual thing as 'blasphemy' because it is only shared by a certain percentage of people ie religious people. I know that it can exist for them, however it is meaningless to me hence non-existent in my worldview.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Sept 29, 2019 4:26:56 GMT
Piss Christ is a criticism of American Christianity. Artist Andreas Serrano: I had no idea Piss Christ would get the attention it did, since I meant neither blasphemy nor offense by it. I've been a Catholic all my life, so I am a follower of Christ.
Serrano has not ascribed overtly political content to Piss Christ and related artworks, on the contrary stressing their ambiguity. He has also said that while this work is not intended to denounce religion, it alludes to a perceived commercializing or cheapening of Christian icons in contemporary culture. Subsequently, he has explicitly rejected the assertion that he was motivated by blasphemy, saying instead that it was intended as a serious work of Christian art. He said, "What it symbolizes is the way Christ died: the blood came out of him but so did the piss and the shit. Maybe if Piss Christ upsets you, it's because it gives some sense of what the crucifixion actually was like... I was born and raised a Catholic and I've been a Christian all my life." — Wikipedia I think Serrano is being disingenuous. Though I don't necessarily agree with the implications of the work itself, it was so obviously created to be blasphemous and take a jab at Christianity. Yes, Jesus was human. But if I were to take a picture of Martin Luther King or Gandhi and cover it with excrement and call it art, would liberals and atheists be so accepting of it? No, it would obviously be a repudiation of what those men stood for, equality and civil rights for all. So Serrano cannot tell me he merely wanted to show the humanity of Christ. He was attacking Christianity for the crusades and the witch trials and the intolerance of Christian fundamentalists. Serrano obviously got cold feet when he was attacked in the media and put forward a cover story. You see, this is the perfect beauty of 'art', because it is the ultimate means of expression of ideas making people 'think' and not always agree. It can be SO many things to so many people, it is so exciting a concept. Many people don't even 'get' the idea of 'conceptual art' of which this an example, let alone 'performance art' and many other genres. I spent an entire year at University studying 'What is Art'? Even then it wasn't long enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Sept 29, 2019 4:37:12 GMT
gozEither way, there is a difference between not believe in God, and another one entirely to show outright disrespect towards Him like the general thing described in the topic does where this person went out of their way to disrespect Jesus Christ and basically hides under the guise of "art". because one can only go so far with their art before it's just trash/immoral/wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Sept 29, 2019 5:05:50 GMT
goz Either way, there is a difference between not believe in God, and another one entirely to show outright disrespect towards Him like the general thing described in the topic does where this person went out of their way to disrespect Jesus Christ and basically hides under the guise of "art". because one can only go so far with their art before it's just trash/immoral/wrong. Did you also know that art can never be 'wrong'? The reason for that is the reaction to art is totally 'in the eye of the beholder' in other words a reaction to an artwork is totally under your own control and what you make of it. The artists shares some emotions or thoughts or philosophies however it is for you to react, and think about it and make of it what you will. If you are outraged or repulsed or whatever, it is totally on YOU, and this is often what the artists is aiming for.
|
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Sept 29, 2019 5:24:14 GMT
gozIt surely can be wrong as it's soaking a Crucifix, which represents God, in urine (sort of like peeing on a crucifix, which is obviously disrespectful). you just don't do that as people lack decency/standards nowadays. but as the saying goes... 'you reap what you sow'. some people have it coming. I can't really be any more obvious than this. but the godless types like you try to say anything to justify something that's obviously disrespectful/wrong. it's something decent people just don't do.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Sept 29, 2019 5:31:25 GMT
goz It surely can be wrong as it's soaking a Crucifix, which represents God, in urine (sort of like peeing on a crucifix, which is obviously disrespectful). you just don't do that as people lack decency/standards nowadays. but as the saying goes... 'you reap what you sow'. some people have it coming. I can't really be any more obvious than this. but the godless types like you try to say anything to justify something that's obviously disrespectful/wrong. it's something decent people just don't do. Why is it wrong? That is your perception of the artwork and your opinion...just like the artist wanted you to do. It has done its job,it is however not, and CAN'T we WRONG. Just think about how non-Catholics of other denominations interpret the Bible differently to you, and whilst you think they are 'wrong' it is their interpretation and opinion to which they have just as much right as you. Same thing. What gives your opinion more credence than the next person?
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Sept 29, 2019 5:36:34 GMT
I think Serrano is being disingenuous. Though I don't necessarily agree with the implications of the work itself, it was so obviously created to be blasphemous and take a jab at Christianity. Yes, Jesus was human. But if I were to take a picture of Martin Luther King or Gandhi and cover it with excrement and call it art, would liberals and atheists be so accepting of it? No, it would obviously be a repudiation of what those men stood for, equality and civil rights for all. So Serrano cannot tell me he merely wanted to show the humanity of Christ. He was attacking Christianity for the crusades and the witch trials and the intolerance of Christian fundamentalists. Serrano obviously got cold feet when he was attacked in the media and put forward a cover story. You see, this is the perfect beauty of 'art', because it is the ultimate means of expression of ideas making people 'think' and not always agree. It can be SO many things to so many people, it is so exciting a concept. Many people don't even 'get' the idea of 'conceptual art' of which this an example, let alone 'performance art' and many other genres. I spent an entire year at University studying 'What is Art'? Even then it wasn't long enough. It is an act of disrespect to Christians. It is blasphemy. And it was an ingenious idea. I just don't understand why Serrano won't take credit for it. There is no way he made that to show the humanity of Christ.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Sept 29, 2019 5:41:23 GMT
You see, this is the perfect beauty of 'art', because it is the ultimate means of expression of ideas making people 'think' and not always agree. It can be SO many things to so many people, it is so exciting a concept. Many people don't even 'get' the idea of 'conceptual art' of which this an example, let alone 'performance art' and many other genres. I spent an entire year at University studying 'What is Art'? Even then it wasn't long enough. It is an act of disrespect to Christians. It is blasphemy. And it was an ingenious idea. I just don't understand why Serrano won't take credit for it. There is no way he made that to show the humanity of Christ. Have you read my posts and understood them? There is no such thing as 'blasphemy' for an unbeliever and the disrespect aspect is on those who feel disrespected. It is the intention of an artist to create an object/idea/concept to challenge people to think and feel about it. HOW they feel about his work is on them. This is precisely what makes it 'art' and not a piece of wood or metal in a random shape in a jar of urine.
|
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Sept 29, 2019 5:43:30 GMT
goz You can't see the obvious moral angle here is the core problem. but let me be crystal clear... it's showing disrespect towards Jesus Christ. which is obviously unwise to say the least. Well the Catholic church is started by Jesus Christ who basically put Peter as the first Pope and it went down through the generations til today (see Matthew 16 : 18 ; list of popes from Peter to date... www.newadvent.org/cathen/12272b.htm ). the Catholic church is THE church guided by God. or put it this way... the Catholic church is started by Jesus Christ, other denominations are started by man. a big difference here  or one last thing... if you got a bunch of random people reading the bible, there will be differing opinions on some more major teachings etc and they all can't be right. that's why you need one source who gets it right and that's where the Catholic church comes into play. it translates things correctly in major areas like faith/morals. the Magisterium is the Catholic churches teaching authority given by God and if inline with that is infallible teachings on faith/morals... catholicessentials.net/magisterium.htm and catholicessentials.net/infallibility.htmthat's the gist of it
|
|
